btw the Gajim default blocking option should work in 0.16.7 perfectly
together with blocking command, just for info.
On Topic i think nobody uses Privacy Lists .. like with different lists and
setting active this and that and creating cool special rules. At least not
in Gajim.
Its also very ineff
On Thu, Mar 23, 2017 at 8:09 AM, Dave Cridland wrote:
> I'm in favour of deprecation (but not elimination).
I forgot there was a difference, but I used the word I meant purely by accident.
To make sure it's absolutely clear: I am advocating that we move
XEP-0016 to the "Deprecated" stage describ
On 23.03.2017 14:18, Dave Cridland wrote:
On 22 March 2017 at 20:08, Ruslan N. Marchenko wrote:
On 22.03.2017 20:37, Sam Whited wrote:
On Wed, Mar 22, 2017 at 2:28 PM, Yann Leboulanger
wrote:
One nice feature we also don't have with blocking command is blocking a
while group.
Ah yes! I k
On 23.03.2017 14:41, Travis Burtrum wrote:
Hi all,
On 03/22/2017 04:08 PM, Ruslan N. Marchenko wrote:
List allows you creating overriding allow entry which will unblock
single person while keeping the group blocked (order matters).
So does keeping the UI option to block a whole group, and th
Hi all,
On 03/22/2017 04:08 PM, Ruslan N. Marchenko wrote:
> List allows you creating overriding allow entry which will unblock
> single person while keeping the group blocked (order matters).
So does keeping the UI option to block a whole group, and then just
using the blocking command to indivi
On 22 March 2017 at 20:08, Ruslan N. Marchenko wrote:
>
> On 22.03.2017 20:37, Sam Whited wrote:
>>
>> On Wed, Mar 22, 2017 at 2:28 PM, Yann Leboulanger
>> wrote:
>>>
>>> One nice feature we also don't have with blocking command is blocking a
>>> while group.
>>
>>
>> Ah yes! I knew there was som
On 22 March 2017 at 19:08, Sam Whited wrote:
> I'd love your thoughts before I bring this before the council for a vote.
I'm in favour of deprecation (but not elimination).
* Privacy lists are mammothly complicated, and therefore error-prone.
* While it's possible to implement many complex user
On 22.03.2017 20:37, Sam Whited wrote:
On Wed, Mar 22, 2017 at 2:28 PM, Yann Leboulanger wrote:
One nice feature we also don't have with blocking command is blocking a
while group.
Ah yes! I knew there was something else that I was forgetting to
address from last time.
I also think this is
On Mittwoch, 22. März 2017 14:37:07 CET Sam Whited wrote:
> On Wed, Mar 22, 2017 at 2:28 PM, Yann Leboulanger
wrote:
> > One nice feature we also don't have with blocking command is blocking a
> > while group.
>
> Ah yes! I knew there was something else that I was forgetting to
> address from la
On Wed, Mar 22, 2017 at 2:28 PM, Yann Leboulanger wrote:
> One nice feature we also don't have with blocking command is blocking a
> while group.
Ah yes! I knew there was something else that I was forgetting to
address from last time.
I also think this is not a good thing; it is an abuse of ros
One nice feature we also don't have with blocking command is blocking a
while group.
--
Yann
Le 22/03/2017 à 20:08, Sam Whited a écrit :
> TL;DR — Privacy lists don't give us anything that we actually want to
> have that the blocking command doesn't give us already, and they're
> too complicat
TL;DR — Privacy lists don't give us anything that we actually want to
have that the blocking command doesn't give us already, and they're
too complicated.
Hi all,
I would like to restart the discussion on deprecating XEP-0016:
Privacy Lists [1] in favor of XEP-0191: Blocking Command [2].
Current
12 matches
Mail list logo
